Judges and Magistrates 2015 Remuneration: Department of Justice briefing

Meeting report

Opening remarks
The Chairperson asked the Department of Justice to brief the Committee on the draft notice and schedule determining the rates, with effect from 1 April 2015, at which salaries, allowances and benefits would be payable to Constitutional Court judges and judges annually, for approval by Parliament in terms of section 2(4) of the Judges Remuneration and Conditions of Employment Act, 2001.  The Independent Remuneration Commission (IRC) should simply brief Members about the current situation regarding remuneration. As Mr M Mohapi (ANC, Free State) had already highlighted, Members were aware of the issues, so all that was needed was a summary briefing. 

Department of Justice briefing
Mr Blendynn Williams, Director, Legal Services, Ministry of Justice and Correctional Services said that the recommendation of the IRC concerning judges was that the Chief Justice, up to the level of the President of the Supreme Court of Appeal, would receive a 5% increase, and judges from the level of Judge President of the High Court and Labour Court to judges of the High Court and Labour Court, would receive a 5.5% increase.

The President had determined that Constitutional Court judges and all other levels of judges would receive a 4.4% increase, in view of the economic situation that the House was aware of, subject to approval by this House.

Regarding magistrates, it had been indicated by the Commission that there should be a 5.5% increase from the position of Special Grade Chief Magistrate, which was equivalent to the level of the Regional Court President, to Chief Magistrate. An increase of 6% had been recommended for senior magistrates and magistrates.

He summed up that those were the three categories -- the Chief Magistrate, Regional Magistrate and Regional Court President – who would get a 5.5% increase. On the other hand, Magistrates to Senior Magistrates would obtain an increase of 6%.   This would be effective from 1 April 2015.

Mr Williams indicated that there had been some engagement between the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Finance about closing the gap between what the magistrates earned and what the judges earned. This was because there had always been a concern that the gaps needed to be narrowed, since there was currently a 56% gap between what the magistrates and judges earned. The suggested increases were not a lot, but they were a step towards narrowing the gap.

The suggested increases were 4.4% for judges and 6% for ordinary magistrates. That would bring the gap closer to 50%.

The Department of Justice had recommended that the House approve the increases recommended by the President so that they could go ahead and process the increments.

Discussion
The Chairperson asked whether the Members needed clarity.

Mr Mohapi said there was no need for clarity since it was a well-researched remuneration package based on an independent body’s research, and an approach by the President that ensured that the economic challenges of South Africa had been taken into consideration. He proposed that the House approve the budget, as presented by the Justice Department.

Ms G Manopole (ANC, Northern Cape) said that she seconded Mr Mohapi for his comments on the work done by the Commission. She asked for progress on the issue of medical aid. The issues that had been raised were still lingering, and needed to be addressed.

Mr  Williams responded that, as already indicated to the House, the medical aid and pension proposals needed to be subjected to a comprehensive review by the Commission, and the government would make its submission based on that review. The Commission had not started with the comprehensive review yet because there were still engagements concerning the cost and the time it would take to conduct the review process. Following this, the ministry would make its own submission. 

Mr S Thobejane (ANC, Limpopo) asked whether the Department had the budget to comply with the proposal, given it was the last month of the financial year, or would the ministry instead push the proposed increases back to the next financial year?

Mr  Williams responded that with regard to the budget availability and South Africa’s finance system, the financing of judges and magistrates was a direct charge on the revenue fund. As a result, what got approved, got paid. It would be obtained directly from the fund. The Minister of Finance had dealt with this matter and as a result, there would be money available for the increased remuneration of judges and magistrates. 

Ms T Wana (ANC, Eastern Cape) asked whether the proposed percentage increases took inflation into account. She also asked for clarity on section 12(1) of the Magistrate Act of 1993 and the fact that the ministry sought to repeal it.

Mr  Williams responded that the ministry was seeking to repeal the Magistrates Act of 1993 which was enacted by this Parliament, to enhance the independence of the magistracy and bring it into line with the constitution. It did not require a comprehensive review.

Referring to the inflation issue, he said that in terms of the recommendation by the Commission, they had looked at the inflation rate. The government notice that was published on 20 November 2015 was an applicable report.  In calculating the increases, the consumer price index was looked at. It had peaked at 6%, but had also declined to 4.4%. They had also taken the projected inflation for 2016 into consideration. The average was between 6% and 6.2%.

This meant that when one considered the salary of judges, the increase was 4.4%, and although this was below the inflation rate, it was reasonable. However, the magistrates were at least on 6% and the more senior magistrates were getting 5.5%.

The Chairperson asked whether it was still in order for the proposal to be approved, as moved by Mr Mohapi and Ms Manopole.

The Members approved.

The meeting was adjourned.